Talk:Chaac

---

I took out the below 2 sentences, as they seem to differ from the sources I've read. Might the last be a confusion between Chac and the Corn God Yum Kaax? -- Infrogmation

"Later, he replaced Kan as one of the Bacabs, a wind god devoted to the direction east and the color yellow."

"He was a very kind god and taught the Mayans agriculture."

---

East is mentioned twice in the article:

• "Chac Xib Chac", Red Chac of the East
• "Kan Xib Chac", Yellow East Chac

I suppose one of them should have been south, but which one?

- Kaare 13:54, 21 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Article rename

Hi there Drini, hope you had a good holiday back in Yucatán! While I agree that "Chaac" is a more faithful rendition of this deity's name than "Chac", it should also be noted that these days most recent scholars and works (ie, since the mid-90s) follow the orthography as standardised by the Academia de Lenguas Mayas de Guatemala, and transcribe the name as Chaak. At some point I'd like to update the orthography across the various Maya articles to follow this more contemporary practice, for greater consistency, and I'd suggest that "Chaak" becomes the preferred name for this particular article. In the meantime however, I'll add a little explanation re orthographies in the text. Cheers, --cjllw | TALK 01:36, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm from yucatan, and I've never heard before the deity being named Chac, as chac means red, and chaac the god (the pronounciation differs) that's why I put "chac xib chaac", the first one for red, the last one for the name (actually it wasnt' a god that splitted in four, Chaac is like the father god, and there are four "chaques" (helpers) assigned to cardinal points, all under Chaac power (this particular bit I just was reminded of 3 days ago while I was at uxmal). -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 07:26, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, as it was pointed above, there was 2 chaques assigned to east. South correspond to yellow, so I went and fixed that too. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 07:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to help you with the ortography explanation. Here's a link to the mayan-spanish dictionary from the Autonomous University of Yucatan: letter CH, notice CHAK means red (rojo) (as you poined, the ortography used nowadays) and CHAAK means rain (lluvia).

However, although nowadays ot's been standarized as Chaak, I think the Chaac name should still be used as main title since it's the most recognized and used as of now (and thus it's more likely that a visitor would type that when looking for the article). But yes, an explanation of Chac/chak/chaak/chaac/... should be in the article -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 07:35, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the links Drini. I would still prefer however to use a consistent orthography for Maya articles in general, and to me the orthography which makes most sense to use is that of the Academia de Lenguas Mayas. This is for a couple of reasons: firstly, it is the first comprehensive orthography for which there has been a formal standard written, and it has been very widely adopted by scholars in the field, and the Maya communities themselves (or so I understand). The field of Maya studies has often complained about the inconsistent orthographies which have been in use, which lead to some confusion and inaccuracies (such as in this particular case; note also that kan should be k'an in this context as well), and while not (yet) universally adopted, most professional sources written in the past ten years or so now use it, a trend which will presumably continue. Secondly, even though (as you point out) other spellings may be more familiar to the reader (since used by earlier and popular works), it is not always possible to determine which is "most common". For example, I think that "Chac" is actually the most common spelling to have been used for this deity- this spelling appears in popular works by such noted authorities as Michael Coe and Stephen Houston. By instead using the contemporary orthography (even if it is not as yet the "most common"), we can avoid such debates and judgement calls. Of course, all alternate spellings should be referenced in the article, and redirects will ensure that the reader is directed to the article whichever of the variant spellings they may be more familiar with.--cjllw | TALK 22:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I have reworked the article by removing unnecessary detail (such as the Yucatec words for the directional colours), and adding relevant information plus some references.86.87.62.150 14:44, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Great water cycle: out of place

I removed the section about the Huaxtec water cycle, since its relevance to the Classical Mayas is uncertain.77.162.130.139 (talk) 11:43, 12 April 2013 (UTC)